Introduction
Between 1603 and 1606, William Shakespeare inducted a new tragedy into his portfolio of plays. This story revolved around an egotistical potentate who committed the peccancy of pride. Through this sin, the protagonist affected his fellow man in a negative way within the universe of Shakespeare’s own King Lear.
The Summary
William Shakespeare’s King Lear opens with the powerful ruler of Britain, Lear, dividing his kingdom amongst his daughters and their suitors. Two of his three daughters tell him how much they adore Lear, while the third, Cordelia, speaks the absolute truth when she says words cannot describe her love. Outraged, Lear banishes Cordelia, and her defender Kent, from his kingdom, giving her portion of land to her sisters. Fortunately, the King of France is so moved by her honesty, he takes her in to be his Queen.
Now in Act II, Kent, who has come back disguised as a servant to the King, defends Lear’s honor by fighting Oswald, the servant of Lear’s daughter. Lear finds out what has happened, and learns his daughters are plotting against him. In a fit of rage, Lear decides not to stay with either daughter.
During Act III, Lear wanders the countryside during a ferocious thunderstorm. Meanwhile, Kent sends out a messenger to inform Cordelia what has happened to her father. Unfortunately, the King of France (Cordelia’s husband), now plans to invade England.
In Act IV, Cordelia is saddened by her father’s current predicament. So saddened that she desperately sends out her men to find Lear before the battle begins. Luckily, she finds him and finds out that Lear regrets what he had done to her.
Disastrously, however, Cordelia’s sister killed herself, while also poisoning the other. Lear and Cordelia are imprisoned and, even though Lear has achieved redemption and sanity, he seems to be punished by Cordelia’s own death. Heartbroken, Lear dies soon after, leaving the throne open for Albany.
Character Analysis
“My life I never held but as a pawn to wage against thine enemies, nor fear to lose it. Thy safety being motive.” These are the first lines of Kent from William Shakespeare’s tragedy King Lear. Coming out of Act I – Scene 1, we notice Kent is faithful to his King; saying that he will go as far as it takes, most likely death, to protect Lear. Out of this sense of Semper Fi, Kent proves to be an important asset to both Lear’s life and Shakespeare’s own play.
Unfortunately, Kent’s king fails to recognize this purest form of loyalty, and banishes him from his kingdom. Kent, being the good-natured and clever man he is, comes back to pull a Winter’s Tale move, and disguises himself as a peasant to serve Lear again. Through this we can assume that the physical appearance of Kent would have had very fine clothing, skin, and hair when he was himself, but changed into a ragged peasant boy by dirtying himself up a bit.
Although a mere change of clothes changes his persona, his loyalty for his King is ever-changing and seems to intensify further into the story. He does all of this unconditionally throughout the story, until the end, when he tries to explain to Lear who he really is. Lear is too distracted with the death of Cordelia though, so he shrugs it off.
Despise the let down, Kent is offered Lear’s old kingdom by Albany, as Lear himself has passed away through the grieving his own ironic story-line inspired. Kent, being the incredibly steadfast man he is, refuses (Just as Peter had refused to be crucified in the same fashion of Christ), and tells Albany he will follow Lear into death. Through Kent’s loyalty, he saves Lear from himself and others, rekindles the bond between father and daughter, puts the world back as it once was, and shows a true sense of patriotism. Because of this character and his decisions, lessons can be taught. Just as the Bible says, “Do not let loyalty and faithfulness forsake you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart.” If the characters of King Lear had known this line, perhaps their actions would have been different.
Personal Analysis
For the first Act, I wasn’t impressed. I began to become interested when Lear screams like a lunatic while facing the ferocious thunderstorm. It quickly died off, however, until my interest was peaked at the ironic demise of Cordelia and Lear.
This isn’t to say the play isn’t good, it just lost my interest easily. After I began to ‘study’ and not ‘read’ the play, however, I saw themes, patterns, and messages. For example, a particular theme to the play has a hint of pathetic fallacy to it. The best scene in the play, in my opinion, is exactly that thunderstorm storm scene when both the fury of nature and the fury of Lear are in sync.
A pattern I saw was the pattern of nature (in the sense of fate and the supernatural). Gloucester is an astrologist and Lear seems to use the actual word ‘nature’ in some expression or another in arguments many times. Other characters remark about something being natural or unnatural.
The message of King Lear can be summed up briefly. The only hope we have is try to be decent with other humans. Imagine if Lear took what Cordelia said about her love for him as a compliment. She would have stopped her sisters from taking Lear’s remaining power, there would have been no battle between France and England, and Cordelia would have not died so soon.
Critical Analysis
Within King Lear, Gloucester remarks on the injustice, lack of order, and sheer nihilistic theme of this play. He is quoted saying, “As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; / They kill us for their sport” (Shakespeare, 1606. IV.i.37-38). What this passage refers to is Gloucester’s thoughts regarding the gods within King Lear’s universe controlling the affairs of man for their own amusement, proposing that there is no reason why things happen.
To say that Shakespeare’s most thrilling play is truly about nothing, however, would not be fair. The play raises topics such as greed and madness. In a parallel dimension, imagine if Shakespeare wrote Goneril and Regan as contempt characters. If the greed within had not driven them to reject Lear to gain power, the play would have
gone a totally different direction. The same argument can apply to many different issues within the play, such as madness. Being a major theme, James Topham explains it further:
“Madness has played a significant part in the critical reception of King Lear, and for good reason. As the storm rages around him, Lear goes mad, tormented by the agony of the turn his life has taken, and holds an imaginary court in which he tries his daughters for their treachery. This madness, the play seems to suggest, the natural reaction to a life that lacks meaning or purpose. The world of Lear is one that is bleak…” (2007).
A symbol for this madness could be ‘blindness.’ Both metaphorical (the poor choices of the characters) and physical (Gloucester) blindness are present. Through Lear’s lack of wisdom (blindness), he banished the only daughter that loved him, and the only servant who would stick with him to the end. Gloucester had the physical blindness, but ironically enough, only when he lost his sight did the treachery of his son come clear to him.
Although King Lear is a tragedy and seems unjust at the end, there are some positive outlooks. The idea of reconciliation exists. Lear reconnects with the only daughter that truly loved him (albeit for a short moment), and realizes the mistakes he has made. Patricia Coleman argues that the whole play is not a case study of sin or the effects of sin, but of the hope for atonement and reconciliation of that sin (Coleman, 1992). The hope that Lear could recognize his mistakes, and soon atone for them.
King Lear is said to be Shakespeare’s finest works. This theory is supported by double-plots, ironic plot twists, and the tragic (yet memorable) ending. Shakespeare had the flaw of egotism burn in the soul of Lear. This affected the choices he made, and the choices he made affects the other characters most disastrously. Through this thought process, the reader could learn to be more cautious around acting first and thinking later.
Conclusion
Perhaps Shakespeare penned this performance for the mere sake of a pleasant experience at the theatre. Possibly he wrote it for the glory and gold. Whichever the reason, a byproduct of King Lear could most arguably be a parable of pride and its product.
Bibliography
Coleman, King Lear: An Optimist Tragedy (1992).
http://www.bard.org/education/studyguides/kinglear/learoptimistic.html
Shakespeare, King Lear (1606).
Logan, Iowa: Cover Craft Publishing
Topham, King Lear (2004).
http://classiclit.about.com/od/kinglearshakespeare/fr/aa_kinglear.htm
